Thepercentage of people who would have passed up over 7 billion dollars like Jonas Salk to refuse to patent his invention to keep the costs low in order to save as many lives as possible?

The percentageof people who would have donated their $40 Million Lottery winnings to cancer charities like Tom Crist after he won the Lottomax jackpot in Calgary, Alberta having lost his wife two years prior to cancer?

The percentageof people who would ask little girls for their autographs as if they were legitimate princesses like Freddie Wieczorke, a semi-retired security guard at Disney World?

The percentage of people who would voluntarily shielded the body of a woman he had never met before that day, the 22-year-old Robert Cook, a skydiving instructor did a young woman?

The percentageof people who raised almost $25,000.00 for a revolutionary operation to walk again after having been paralyzed from a biking accident only to donate every cent of it to a 6-year-old with cerebral palsy who needed a similar operation like Daniel Black?

The percentageof who would stop at a BE THE MATCH station and found that he would be a perfect match for a man with a rare disorder of Leukemia knowing that it would cost him a chance to compete for The American East Championships that not only could land Cameron Lyle in the Olympics but also was the culmination of over 8 years of training?

Recently, the adage “Money can’t buy happiness” was given a leg to stand on by a study suggesting a raise won’t have a real impact on your state of mind. But a different study claims that in regard to your income, there is totally a financial sweet spot for optimal satisfaction.

The expansive study, published in the journal, Nature Human Behaviour, used a Gallup World Poll to evaluate the income and happiness of 1.7 million people around the world. The authors of the research found monetary averages associated with satisfaction: For daily emotional well-being, people were generally best off earning $60,000 to $75,000 a year, but for long-term satisfaction, the mark was $95,000.

In North America (and most “wealthy” countries), for daily emotional well-being, the sweet spot is an annual income of $65,000 to $95,000, and for long-term satisfaction that number is $105,000.

Those numbers are the worldwide average, however; the averages vary from country to country, and in North America (and most “wealthy” countries) they are higher. For daily emotional well-being, the sweet spot here is $65,000 to $95,000, and for long-term satisfaction that number is $105,000. The area with the lowest income marker for long-term satisfaction is Latin America, at $35,000, and Australia and New Zealand report the highest, at $125,000.

People were likely to see decreased happiness if they achieved more than the optimal income for long-term satisfaction, partially due to a phenomenon Money described as the “hedonic treadmill,” in which people adjust to increases in income.

But happiness does peak at a certain point, according to the researchers. If people achieved more than the optimal income for long-term satisfaction, they were likely to see decreased happiness, partially due to a phenomenon Money described as the “hedonic treadmill.” This describes when people very quickly adjust to increases in income.

Still, the study has its shortcomings: Gauging and measuring happiness is a subjective practice that often relies on self-reporting. Additionally, the study examined individual income instead of household income, which might have skewed conclusions about how much money someone needs in order to be happy. Not to mention that the concept of happiness itself is contentious, and many nations don’t place as much weight on it as Americans do.

SIGN UP & NEVER MISS A POST!

My name is Chuck Behrens, serving others to help others serve. I value your time and take your readership seriously. Follow along and together lets become Expert Members of Triple A: Accessible. Accountable. Available.